18 April 2010

The new multilateralism of climate change | The Climate Institute

Today I want to make three main points:

1. Copenhagen didn't go backwards, it did go forward but not as much as was hyped or hoped. This was because of crucial misunderstandings and new developments in climate geopolitical factions.2. We need a glass half full approach to the Accord and climate negotiations, not just because it is the only one we’ve got but also because of developments before and after Copenhagen. 3. Filling the rest of the glass requires delivery of a. fast start finance commitments made in Copenhagen, b. a new approach to climate multilateralism, its forums and its factions and, c. even more important than ever, credible domestic policies

At the core of the challenge of the new climate realpolitik, the new climate multilateralism are two questions:

· Is an all embracing legally binding treaty possible or required to drive the much stronger action we need?· Will Australia and others be creative and committed enough, amongst souring domestic politics, to play a constructive role? Or will Australia drift back to old factions, a narrow focus, and even worse back to being a millstone on climate negotiations.